| From: | Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Luke Lonergan <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Which qsort is used |
| Date: | 2005-12-13 18:28:46 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0512131326050.27185@josh.db |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Luke Lonergan wrote:
>
> Might you have time to implement these within the testing framework I
> published previously? It has both the NetBSD and qsortG included along with
> a timing routine, etc.
>
Here we go:
http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~zhouqq/postgresql/sort/sort.html
The source tar ball and linux 2.4G gcc 2.96 test results is on the page.
There is a clear loser glibc, not sure qsortB or qsortG which is better.
Regards,
Qingqing
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dann Corbit | 2005-12-13 18:40:17 | Re: Which qsort is used |
| Previous Message | Francisco Figueiredo Jr. | 2005-12-13 16:48:41 | Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bug] Server Crash, possible security exploit, |